The Press. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1906. A WELLINGTON LAND TIUNSSACTION.

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 13226, 21 September 1908, Page 6

The Press. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1906. A WELLINGTON LAND TIUNSSACTION.

The public of Wellington have boon considerably exorcised for some time regarding a rather curious transaction in land, attention to which was drawn in the first place by Mr F. M. B. Fisher, M.P. Tho history of the transaction is sot out in tho correspondence which was laid before Parliament audi the evidence taken before a Parliamentary Committee which has just reported upon it. There is, as visitors to Wellington will remember, a short, steep street leading from Lambton quay to Wellington terrace, just opposite the Wellington Club. In May, last year, Messrs Macdonald, Wilson! and Co., a Wellington firm of landbrokers, of which the Hon. T. K. Macdonald is tho head, wrote to tho Secretary of tho Crown Lands Department, stating that the City Council were anxious to improve Woodward street, and to accomplish this it wasS necessary that tho Council should absorb some four or five perches of the section at tho corner of Woodward street. Tho cost of compensation, however, would probably bo co heavy as to prevent the improvement from taking place, but this would be avoided if tho Council wero in the position of being able to transfer to the owner of tho corner section a sectioil of somewhat similar 6ize and valuo which had recently been vested in tho Government} as derelict land. ''We shall, therefore, "be glad to know." -continued the writers, "if tho Government would " aasiet the matter by placing a fair 1 " pric* upon tho latter section, whew "th» City Council and the owner could ♦'adjust the matter, and a very noces*'*ary public work be made possible." In regard to this lotter the Committee have found that it was written on behalf of tho Council. It ,i_ not" cx-

plained, however, why the Mayor ort tho Town Clerk,did not make the application. Nor until the Government had consented to sell the land! was it disclosed that the owner with whom the Council proposed to mako the exchange was the Hon. T. Kennedy Macdonald, whose firm first approached tho Government in this matter. The application went through tho usual routine, and was ultimately referred by the Hon. K-. McXaib to Cabinet. Tho upshot was that the Government agreed to sell the land to tho Council for tho value put upon it by tho Valuer-General, namely, £652- Then the Mayor of Wellington, Mr T. W. Hislop, wrote to th© (Minister for Lands disclosing the name of Mr T. K. Macdonald as the owner with whom the Council proposed to effect an exchange of land, aud stating that it was found that if the land wero first conveyed io the Council, the latter would not be able to 6ell it again. His Worship therefore asked that tho land' should be conveyed direct to Mr Macdonald, the Council paying tho Government the £652. This the Govcrmmen't very obligingly agreed to do, the exchange waa made, the required alteration, in tho level o£ Woodward street was effected, and visitors to Wellington will agree with us that the access to the club and that part of Wellington terrace has been very decidedly improved. Incidentally, it may he remarked that if Messrs Macdonald, Wilson and Co. were very successful in their application to the Government, on behalf of the Council, Mr Kennedy Macdonald has no reason to complain' of the result of his own negotiations with tho city. He received tho Government section for which the city paid £652; ho 'himself conveyed to tho Council not " four or five perches," as stated in Messrs ,Macdonald, Wilson and Co.'s letter, but only 0.47 of a perch, and in addition the city paid for costly concrete walls to be used for the foundations of th© building to bo erected by him on his site.

The question which the Parliamentary Committee had to decide was as to whether there was anything in tho transaction with tho Government which was open to criticism from a public! point oi view. Their report was completely in the Government's favour. They stated that tihie Minister agreed to sell tho hund solely to enable the City Council to carry out a (public improvement, that the Lands Department adopted "tho proper and Con'•'stittltiomal course" of arriving at the value of the section by employing the official valuer of the Valuation Department, who valued it at £652, which the Committee was satisfied was a fair value. They thought it was "a matter for regret that Messrs Macdonald, Wilson and Co., should not have been more careful when stating the area of the strip of land to be conveyed to tho City Council. There was little doubt, they thought, that this mistake had given rise to much of the oommont on the subject. Tho Committee, however, were satisfied that the area of tho strip was not a determining factor with the Minister for Lands in deciding to sell the land to the Council. The Committee had no opinion to ©spread in regard to tho cost of erecting the concrete wall and foundations, that being a matter with which the City Council was solely concerned." We do not know that we see any reason to' dissent from this finding. Nevertheless, there is one passage in the evidence of the Under-Secretary for Lands with which we confess to feeling a good deal of sympathy. He said that if he had known that Mr Macdonald, a member of the Legislature, was the owner of the land, ho would not have recommended that the derelict land should be sold to him without competition. Mr Macdonald should have applied himself for the land, and they would probably have out it up to auction. "But," he added, "this being a "city matter, I did not take these "matters into consideration, because I "did not then know that Mr Mac"donald was then #1© owner." There is no doubt in our mind that this would havo been the proper, straightforward course to pursue, and we daresay that if Mr McNab had known in tho first instance as much as he knows now he would not have shown quite so niucW compliance as he did. The action of the Government in allowing this land to be sold privately to the adjoining owner has excited the more comment, because in other cases in Wellington the Government havo refused to dispose of derelict land except by auction, and in c those cases the adjoining owner anxiou3 to get the section has had to pay through the nose for it. As to tho nature of the deal by which Mr Macdonald managed to get his valuable concrete walls and 6.7 perches of land in exchange for less than half a perch of bis own section, the Council at the same time carrying out work which must have improved the value of his property, that is a matter for the citizens of Wellincton to consider. If I they arc satisfied nobody elso has any j right to complain.